From the time he took office, President Joe Biden signaled “a clear commitment to science” and pledged sweeping initiatives to elevate the role of science in the federal government.
But instead of science, the Biden Administration immediately leaned into the concept of “indigenous knowledge” and allowed Interior Secretary Deb Haaland to use the loosely defined knowledge to cancel seven oil and gas leases in Alaska.
“Interior claimed that its environmental review supporting the cancellations was made with ‘the best available science and in recognition of the Indigenous Knowledge of the original stewards of this area’” according to Protect the Public Trust, which filed a complaint against the Biden Administration.
The complaint, which is not a lawsuit, was filed with Mark Lee Greenblatt, who heads up the office of the Inspector General of the Department of Interior; Arati Prabhakar, who is the director of the White House Office of Science and Technology Policy; Laura Daniel-Davis, acting deputy secretary of Interior; and Alondra Nelson, deputy director for Science and Society White House Office of Science and Technology Policy.
The watchdog group said that the White House, through the Council on Environmental Quality and Office of Science and Technology Policy, subsequently backed away from its own policy commitment by providing guidance that encouraged agencies to “promote and enable a government-wide effort to improve the recognition and inclusion of Indigenous Knowledge” in research, policy, and other decision making.
In canceling the Alaska leases, Interior claimed that its environmental review was made with “the best available science and in recognition of the Indigenous Knowledge of the original stewards of this area ….”
Protect the Public Trust says that equating indigenous knowledge with objective data and science is in conflict with principles of scientific integrity found in federal law and Interior’s own guidance on scientific integrity in place at the time the leases were cancelled.
“The American public can rightly hold serious concerns that the Biden administration’s decision making, through the use of Indigenous Knowledge, is susceptible to manipulation without even the pretense of adhering to scientific principles,” Protect the Public’s Trust Director Michael Chamberlain wrote in the complaint, which can be read here:
The White House explains indigenous knowledge this way:
“Indigenous Knowledge is a body of observations, oral and written knowledge, innovations, practices, and beliefs developed by Tribes and Indigenous Peoples through interaction and experience with the environment. The Biden-Harris Administration has formally recognized Indigenous Knowledge as one of the many important bodies of knowledge that contributes to the scientific, technical, social, and economic advancements of the United States and our collective understanding of the natural world.”
“Federal decision making is best when informed by all forms of knowledge,” said the president’s Science and Technology Advisor and OSTP Director Prabhakar. “This Guidance will help Federal agencies integrate Indigenous Knowledge in their work—from research, to environmental rulemaking, to co-management of lands and waters.”
Many indigenous groups in the Americas employed mystical shamans, and some groups practiced human sacrifice (Natchez, notably). For others, such as the Cherokee, Hopi, and Navajo, indigenous knowledge included beliefs malevolent beings or spirits who could create harm or death to their tribes. Some of the beliefs included elements of witchcraft, magic, and spell-casting. Many practiced a form of animism, in which all things have spirits.
Read the Biden White House commitment to indigenous knowledge here.
Protect the Public’s Trust is a nonpartisan organization dedicated to promoting ethics in government and restoring the public’s trust in government officials.
“A loss of trust in public officials resulting from their abandonment of dispassionate, bedrock scientific principles in one area, can result in citizens rejecting or simply ignoring even the most scientifically sound directives in other areas,” the group says.
